Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

LocaJoy Holiday | Crazy Coaster | Intamin 10 inversion

Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

_koppen said:
Well the speed of a ride is always used to calculate the forces of the ride, but the reason for the double spine is to save on the numbers of footers.

The rides would have been fine with the old track style, they would just have had to use a lot more supports.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so hence:
_koppen said:
This is wrong, the double spine is used to minimize the numbers of footers and supports.
Has nothing to do with the ride going 150mph or needing extra stability.
Click to expand...
Isn't entirely true, is it? Stress on the track and number of footers are directly related. If you want to use fewer supports, you're going to need a thicker spine to support the forces. The sole reason for the thicker spine is not to minimize number of supports, there are other factors that drive how many supports you need/can have.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Hixee said:
The sole reason for the thicker spine is not to minimize number of supports, there are other factors that drive how many supports you need/can have.
Click to expand...

Well then, tell me!
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

_koppen said:
Hixee said:
The sole reason for the thicker spine is not to minimize number of supports, there are other factors that drive how many supports you need/can have.
Click to expand...

Well then, tell me!
Click to expand...
-Cost: sometimes making lots of small supports doesn't cost any more/less than having fewer and thicker track (for example, Superman at SFA has a whole ton on that bottom corner. They could have used the quad-track and fewer supports, but they didn't).
-Geology: often the number of supports is strongly limited by the ground below. If the ground is too soft you need more supports, if the ground is hard then you don't need as many.
-Local features: paths, lakes, buildings, other rides, all will make a difference as to how many (and where) you put supports.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that they don't want to minimize the number of supports, but if they did then all the track would be bulky right? Minimizing the number of supports is always a contributing factor (footers are expensive etc), but it's not the only factor. That's all I'm suggesting.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

I think you are misunderstanding me as well.

I get everything you're saying in your last post, and all of it is true, but I'm not arguing against it.

What I'm trying to say is that when the double spine track is used, it is to make it reach longer before the next support.

And when that is not needed, you switch back to single spine track (Formula Rossa is a good example of this).

The double spine is not built because they need the track itself to be more sturdy, or to stand against higher forces that the old track could not handle.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

_koppen said:
The double spine is not built because they need the track itself to be more sturdy, or to stand against higher forces that the old track could not handle.
Click to expand...

No, it was made to stand stronger forces, hence why less supports can be used.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

You guys realize that you're all saying the same thing, right?

Tri rail track costs less to manufacture than double spine due to sheer amount of material. If tri rail track can withstand the load of a moving train, they will use it instead of the double spine to save cost regardless of how many more supports are used.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

You also have to consider that the double spine track is a different gauge from the standard tri-rail track and can't be used interchangeably, as well as the increased bulk of the track decreases the flexibility.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

This will be my last post regarding the subject, I don't feel the need to write more after this.

Ethan said:
_koppen said:
The double spine is not built because they need the track itself to be more sturdy, or to stand against higher forces that the old track could not handle.
Click to expand...

No, it was made to stand stronger forces, hence why less supports can be used.
Click to expand...

That's not why I meant.
What I meant is that the double spine track was not used because the old track style was not strong enough, and could not handle the job on the rides using the double spine.
It was used because it could get the job done using less supports than the old track style.

Antinos said:
Tri rail track costs less to manufacture than double spine due to sheer amount of material.
Click to expand...

You can not compare the triangle style track to the double spine, you compare the double spine to the old square track. I would be very surprised if it was a price difference between those two.

On all the new Intamin rides using triangle track there is no need to use the double spine.
Some parts of those rides, like a top hat for an example, may need the square style of track, but it's not enough to justify the switch to the new track shape.

Bottom_Feeder_13 said:
You also have to consider that the double spine track is a different gauge from the standard tri-rail track and can't be used interchangeably,
Click to expand...

There is a single spine version of the double spine track, that is used on both Formula Rossa and Skyrush.

cf64024f78f0f73631cb8d5a0b55b319ebc413b0.jpg


And here about the coaster in this topic, lap bars only.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Image Blocked，Please re-upload to imgur or other site……
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Great news with lap-bars only! Especiall for tall people like me who struggle with most Intamin otsr restraints. A bummer though if it's the same style as Skyrush.. Let's hope not! Intamin sure can't be that stupid to start puting these on more rides after all the negative criticism they received from Skrush?! :? Most of our group of hardened coaster enthusiasts had complaints during the ERT. And the majority of the general public had severe complaints of pain getting of that ride!
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Im certain there wont be a 7g crunch on this clone to cause the same stapling effect that happened on Skyrush.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Intricks said:
Im certain there wont be a 7g crunch on this clone to cause the same stapling effect that happened on Skyrush.
Click to expand...
Still, whenever there was headbanging, this can cave thighbanging.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

Intricks said:
Im certain there wont be a 7g crunch on this clone to cause the same stapling effect that happened on Skyrush.
Click to expand...
That doesn't change the fact that it's a faulty design. The lapbars are way to thin. Why can't Intamin just realize their mistakes? And make something more similar to what Mack have done (succesfully). I'm mean it obviously will not staple you as much as Skrush, but it still will to some degree and hence be uncomfortable.
 
Re: LocaJoy Holiday | Unknown | Intamin 10 inversion

andrus said:
Intricks said:
Im certain there wont be a 7g crunch on this clone to cause the same stapling effect that happened on Skyrush.
Click to expand...
That doesn't change the fact that it's a faulty design. The lapbars are way to thin. Why can't Intamin just realize their mistakes? And make something more similar to what Mack have done (succesfully). I'm mean it obviously will not staple you as much as Skrush, but it still will to some degree and hence be uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

Ummm...Intamins are a near direct copy of MACKs, they just focus on a smaller part of your thigh than anything else. Yes, it will still staple you but the degree will be far better and woth the softer padding these will most likely have, it wont hurt as bad as what you think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top